大般涅槃經疏 7.16

7.16

次佛答，為三：開譬、合譬、況顯。開譬為四：一生諸子、二付嚴師、三囑苦教、四得福無罪。初王大臣者，譬佛菩薩。生育諸子，譬生信者，生信不同故言諸子。形貌端正，譬戒能防色。聰明黠慧，譬定慧防心。二三四者，有人云：一二是出家二眾，三四是在家二眾。此義不然。舊云：若二是小大，若三是三根，四是四部。此亦不然。一是一乘；二是小大，大是一乘；三是三根，上根是一乘；四是四部，四部中有一乘。若爾，一子諸子，皆處處著亦處處有，是則太亂。今以信心為子，生信不同略為四種，謂藏、通、別、圓，各有三學，通皆得論端正黠慧。準下合文以壞法者為子，此不相乖三種信，偏則破壞法性，即是可悲為子；就正信者，可慈為子。次付嚴師者，舊云：四依為師。依下合文，以國王四部為師。此是秉法之人。而秉法者以法為師，下文云「諸佛所師所謂法也。」法有嚴與不嚴，不嚴有三、嚴即圓法。三「而作」下，囑教。君可教詔者，教偏入圓。威儀禮節者，譬圓戒。技藝譬圓定，書數譬圓慧。學圓速成不須苦切，若不速成要當苦治。杖譬於智，藉杖故子死。如由智故偏破，偏破故如三子死，圓立故如一子成。言破偏者非但治毀，三藏通別持毀悉皆苦治。何以故？於藏是持、於圓是犯，通別亦爾。故言雖喪三子，我終不恨。圓子信常，是故不死。未階究竟，故言苦治。舊以四部為四子。杖殺何部？何部不死？合義不成，不會經文，今所不用。次合譬中，如來合王臣，視壞法者合諸子，國王四部合師，三品法合禮節等，應當苦治合杖死，不也者合唯福無罪（云云）。三從「善男子」去，是況顯。王之與師，是子則念非子不念，成就其子不成就他。偏念偏治尚無有罪，況佛平等慈念、平等成就、平等治之而當有罪？故云如來善修平等心。故王之與師偏念偏教尚得福無量，況復如來等念等教寧不獲福？故舉三世功德，善修是現世、長壽是來世、宿命是過世（云云）。

Next, the Buddha's answer has three parts: setting forth the simile, applying the simile, and bringing out [the meaning] by comparison. Setting forth the simile has four parts: first, siring several sons; second, entrusting them to a strict teacher; third, instructing him to train them sternly; fourth, obtaining merit without fault. First, the king and the great ministers represent the Buddhas and bodhisattvas. Siring several sons represents producing faithful persons; because the faith they produce is not the same, they are called 'several sons.' Having upright and handsome appearances represents morality's ability to guard the physical body. Being clever and sharp-witted represents samādhi and wisdom guarding the mind. As for 'two, three, and four', someone says: 'The first two are the two monastic assemblies, and the third and fourth are the two lay assemblies.' This meaning is incorrect. An older commentary says: 'Two refers to the small and the great [vehicles]; three refers to the three faculties; four refers to the fourfold assembly.' This is also incorrect. If one is the one vehicle; two is the small and the great, where the great is the one vehicle; three is the three faculties, where the superior faculty is the one vehicle; and four is the fourfold assembly, within which there is the one vehicle—if so, the one son and the several sons would be attached everywhere and present everywhere, which would be utterly disordered. Now, we take the faithful mind to be the son; the differences in producing faith are briefly four kinds, namely: Tripiṭaka, Shared, Distinct, and Perfect [teachings], each possessing the three trainings, and in all of them uprightness and cleverness may be discussed. According to the text below that applies the simile, taking the destroyers of the Dharma as the sons does not conflict with this: the three kinds of faith, being one-sided, destroy the dharmatā, and so are fit for compassion as sons; while in terms of correct faith, they are fit for friendliness as sons. Next, entrusting them to a strict teacher: an older commentary says the four reliances are the teacher. According to the text below that applies the simile, the kings and the fourfold assembly are the teacher. These are the persons who uphold the Dharma. And those who uphold the Dharma take the Dharma as their teacher; as the lower text says: 'That which all Buddhas take as teacher is what is called the Dharma.' The Dharma has strict and non-strict: the non-strict are three; the strict is the Perfect Dharma. Third, from 'and saying' downwards is the instruction on training. 'You may instruct them' means instructing the one-sided to enter the Perfect. 'Demeanor and etiquette' represents Perfect morality. 'Arts and skills' represents Perfect samādhi; 'writing and mathematics' represents Perfect wisdom. Learning the Perfect is quickly accomplished without needing severe discipline; but if it is not quickly accomplished, it must be severely punished. The cane represents wisdom; through the cane, the sons die. Just as through wisdom the one-sided is broken, and because the one-sided is broken it is like three sons dying, while because the Perfect is established it is like one son succeeding. Speaking of breaking the one-sided does not only mean punishing violations; whether keeping or violating within the Tripiṭaka, Shared, and Distinct [teachings], all are severely disciplined. Why is this? What is keeping in the Tripiṭaka is a violation in the Perfect, and likewise for the Shared and Distinct. Therefore it says: 'Even though I lose three sons, I will never have regrets.' The son of the Perfect has faith in permanence, and therefore does not die. Having not yet reached the ultimate, it therefore speaks of severe discipline. The older commentary took the fourfold assembly as the four sons: which assembly was beaten to death? Which assembly did not die? The application of meaning fails to work and does not accord with the sūtra text, so we do not adopt it now. Next, in applying the simile: the Tathāgata corresponds to the king and ministers; regarding the destroyers of the Dharma corresponds to the sons; the kings and the fourfold assembly correspond to the teacher; the three grades of teachings correspond to etiquette, etc.; 'should be severely disciplined' corresponds to being beaten to death; 'not so' corresponds to having only merit without fault (and so forth). Third, from 'Good son' downwards is bringing it out by comparison. The king and the teacher care for those who are their sons and do not care for those who are not, and bring their own sons to completion but do not bring others to completion. If one-sided care and one-sided discipline are still without fault, how much less could the Buddha—who has equal compassionate care, equal completion, and equal discipline—have any fault? Therefore it says that the Tathāgata well cultivates an equal mind. Thus, if the king and the teacher, caring and teaching one-sidedly, still obtain immeasurable merit, how could the Tathāgata, caring and teaching equally, fail to obtain merit? Therefore the merits of the three times are cited: 'well cultivates' is the present lifetime, 'long life' is the future lifetime, and 'knowledge of past lives' is the past lifetime (and so forth).